Business Standard

CIC ISSUES SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO URJIT PATEL

- PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

The Central Informatio­n Commission (CIC) has issued a show cause notice to Reserve Bank of India Governor Urjit Patel for “dishonouri­ng” a Supreme Court judgment on disclosure of wilful defaulters’ list. The CIC has also asked the Prime Minister’s Office, the finance ministry, and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to make public the letter of former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan on bad loans. The CIC has asked Patel to explain why a maximum penalty be not imposed on him for “dishonouri­ng” the verdict.

The Central Informatio­n Commission (CIC) has issued a show-cause notice to RBI Governor Urjit Patel for “dishonouri­ng” a Supreme Court judgment on disclosure of the wilful defaulters’ list.

The CIC has also asked the Prime Minister’s Office, the finance ministry and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to make public the letter of former RBI governor Raghuram Rajan on bad loans.

Irked over the denial of informatio­n on disclosure of names of wilful defaulters who have taken bank loans of ~500 million and above by the RBI in spite of a Supreme Court order, the CIC has asked Patel to explain why a maximum penalty should not be imposed on him for “dishonouri­ng” the court verdict, which had upheld a decision taken by then informatio­n commission­er Shailesh Gandhi, calling for disclosure of names of wilful defaulters.

Patel, speaking at the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) on September 20, had said the guidelines on vigilance, issued by the CVC, were aimed at achieving greater transparen­cy, promoting a culture of honesty and probity in public life and improving the overall vigilance administra­tion in the organisati­ons within its purview, the CIC pointed out.

“The commission feels that there is no match between what RBI governor and deputy governor say and their website regarding their RTI policy, and a great secrecy of vigilance reports and inspection reports is being maintained with impunity, in spite of the Supreme Court confirming the orders of the CIC in the Jayantilal case,” Informatio­n Commission­er Sridhar Acharyulu said.

He concluded that it would not serve any purpose to punish the CPIO for this defiance, because he acted under the instructio­ns of the top authoritie­s.

“The commission considers the governor as the deemed PIO responsibl­e for nondisclos­ure and defiance of Supreme Court orders and CIC orders and directs him to show cause why a maximum penalty should not be imposed on him for these reasons, before November 16,” Acharyulu said.

He rejected the arguments of Santosh Kumar Panigrahy of the RBI that section 22 of the Right to Informatio­n (RTI) Act would not override various laws he quoted, prohibitin­g disclosure of names and details of wilful defaulters and hence, the RBI should be discharged from the obligation­s of disclosure.

“His contention that unless the above referred enactments are repealed, the RBI cannot disclose the details of defaulters is also absurd,” Acharyulu said.

He added that another contention of Panigrahy that the pendency of a PIL before the Supreme Court on the issue would prevent him from disclosure was also baseless as he did not present any interim order passed by the Supreme Court preventing the disclosure of names of wilful defaulters or against the proceeding­s before the CIC.

“These submission­s of the RBI show that its legal wing did not bring to the notice of the CPIO that in the RBI vs Jayantilal N Mis try case, a Supreme Court bench consisting of MYEq bat and C Na gap pa nJ J, on December 16, 2015 [Transferre­d Cases (Civil) Nos. 91 to 101 of 2015], gave a landmark decision, upholding the direction of the CIC to disclose the inspection reports of the RBI and the names of wilful defaulters in many cases, rejecting all the above referred contention­s of the RBI,” Acharyulu said.

The informatio­n commission­er said in that case, the counsel for the RBI had raised the same contention­s, referring to the same cases referred by Panigrahy, and those were straightaw­ay rejected by the Supreme Court. “The commission finds no merit in hiding the names of, details and action against wilful defaulters of big bad loans worth hundreds of crores of rupees.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India